User talk:MarnetteD/archive53

A goat for you!

Thank You for helping on Hot tooth syndrome.

Trish pt7 (talk) (talk) 03:18, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome T. MarnetteD|Talk 03:30, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Happy 90th

For my TPWers on Tom Lehrer's 90th birthday I thought I'd leave you this version of The Elements (song) to celebrate. If anyone has ever been or talked to one of his students I have always been curious as to what he was like as a teacher. Happy Happy TL. MarnetteD|Talk 17:32, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

That won't play for me (wrong plugin?), but I like Tom Lehrer. I first heard some of his work, including "The Elements", among the various clips that were the stock of Frank Muir goes into ... in the 1970s on BBC Radio. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:22, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Well rats Redrose64. There are other versions out there but I like this one because they include a list of the "ones that haven't been dis-cah-vered" at the time at the end of the song. I first heard him on the short lived US version of That Was the Week That Was. Here is a treat showing how far ahead of the curve he could be. Just think this is more than 50 years before 50 Shades of Grey :-) MarnetteD|Talk 19:31, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

History of cricket in South Africa from 1990–91 to 2000

Hey there... while the single ref is formatted correctly, if you look at the article, almost every (or every) test match contains a raw link. Neither Reflinks or the other tool (and I'm having a senior moment here, and cannot think of the name), will fix them. Has to be done manually, one by one. Pain in the ass, but if not done, all that info could be lost. On a different note, if another editor used a derogatory term about you, would you ask for it to be revdeled? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:33, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. I hope I didn't give offense with my edit summary - trying to be brief can also leave out politeness. I use both Reflinks and reFill - there may even be others but these are the only ones I'm aware of. Neither one can fix those items. Sorry about that. As I look closer at that page you could try turning all of those ELs in the body of the article into full fledged references and then run one of the two fix programs on them but I don't know how much of a hassle that would be. Now, as to your other question I guess it depends on what the comment is and which admin you ask. There certainly is criteria for removing derogatory comments. You could ask an admin that you know or check for those at Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests and see how it goes. I'm sorry you are having to put up with the tripe that is hitting you today. It is the ultimate in BS to claim that - based on where one lives - one can or cannot have knowledge of a given subject :-) Hang in there. MarnetteD|Talk 00:26, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

No offense taken. I know how brevity can appear to be non-polite, but I also know you and that's not how I took it in the least. Hence, my post on your talk page, to explain why I tagged it. And you're right, not interested enough in the subject matter to go through all that trouble (and your suggested fix is exactly the way I would have handled it). Which is why I tagged it, in the hopes of some editor with interest in the subject matter would undertake that herculean task. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:42, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Linkrot tag

Hi. I think you are misinterpreting the tag. It states, "This article uses bare URLs for citations...", and I think you're missing the 5th type of citation. If you click on the link for citation in the tag, or simply go to WP:CITETYPE which is on that page, the 5th type of citation is "A general reference", which is not an inline citation. I know both reflinks and refill don't "see" anything in an article which doesn't have the <ref> in front of it, but the tag is only to alert editors of the issue, and provide them a tool for a quick fix. I think it should be left. There's an editor, and I can't think of his username at the moment, who does a lot of this type of manual correction when I tag articles like this. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:51, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello again O. Based on this conversation User talk:DESiegel#Thank you I try to avoid using that tag as I agree with that editor that it is misleading since it implies that reFill can fix things. If you click on the blue linked term "reFill tool" the only thing it does is remove the tag. It only works on citations that have the <ref></ref> tags around it. The same is true for Reflinks. Instead I use the tag {{Citation style}} for those. I should also note that items in ELs don't require cite templates or at least I rarely see them. Sources is a different matter but, again, I try to use the other template. I can add that cite templates don't always prevent link rot - I have seen several references with the title "404 error" which I then tag with a dead link template. One other thing - any editor can click on the "reFill tool" link to run the program. It'll fix many of the bare urls - with the notable exception of PFD files. Those it doesn't fix you can just leave and those of us that monitor the Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations will get to them eventually. Now all of this is based on my experience but i know that there are wiki things out there that I will be unaware of. Also, I probably haven't explained this very well so let me know and I can try to go further. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 14:05, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Forgot to ping you Onel5969. Although I suspect you have this page on your watchlist I did want to let you know that I have replied. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 14:08, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

I just saw your post at ANI about the problematic editor from yesterday. I am glad they were blocked. That should give more credence to any items that you think should be rev/deleted if you want to pursue that. MarnetteD|Talk 14:20, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

당신을 위한 반스타!

	오리지널 반스타
	Thank you for your making many good Korean Documents. 칼빈500 (talk) 17:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome and thank you for this barnstar. MarnetteD|Talk 01:58, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Warner Bros. films

Just wondering: What would qualify a movie to be included in Category:Warner Bros. films? I've seen you a remove a lot of films that would seem to qualify. Trivialist (talk) 00:48, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello Trivialist. Please see these two previous threads User talk:MarnetteD/archive50#Categorizing films by distributor. - User talk:MarnetteD/archive52#Film co's for background to help answer your question. My edits are based on this Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Categorization#General categorization which I link to in my edit summaries. The shorter version is that I am removing the films where WB is only the distributor of a film as - per WP:CATDEF - that is not a defining characteristic of a film. I leave the cat in an article whenever they are the (or one of the) companies that produced the film. I hope this helps explain things but if it doesn't I'll be happy to have another go at this. MarnetteD|Talk 02:02, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

I should add that I try to read the article to make sure that I am applying the MOSFILM item correctly but I can make mistakes. Please feel free to re-add the cat if I have done that. MarnetteD|Talk 02:04, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Re: revert on Steve Jackson

Re this revert [1][2]. Thank you, I was being too casual about the edit and should have be more careful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joereddington (talk • contribs) 20:00, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello J. No worries. Your idea has merit. That paragraph could be moved or the section header could be renamed to include larger roles as well as the cameos. MarnetteD|Talk 20:33, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Corinne's talk

Hi MarnetteD; re [3]; actually it was my mistake. I thought the 'no' param was to do with page archiving but it actually enables the display of links to page archives in the archive box. I should have known better, really! The code that actually commands a bot to archive the page was removed a while back. Best regards, Baffle gab1978 15:42, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your message Baffle gab1978. No worries and I had missed the removal of the bot command when it happened so my apologies as well. I think that I will always miss her and her contributions to the 'pedia so I am glad that the heartfelt thoughts of her fellow editors will be there to be seen. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 15:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

And thanks again for the future tag additions when I inevitably forget. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

No worries at all NeilN. I am always happy to help when I can. Enjoy your Wednesday. MarnetteD|Talk 15:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

RIP Bob

Bob Dorough thanks to you (and all of the creators of Schoolhouse Rocks) for making learning fun. My sympathies to your friends and families. Here is one of my faves for my TPWs. MarnetteD|Talk 15:06, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Brian Dennehy

Why did you remove the improvements I made too? When the template was added the header was one sentence and there were 15 sources. Now the header is a good size and there's 24 sources. Why are you still opposed to removing it? --Ramanixo (talk) 16:44, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

A) Several of your changes are purely cosmetic and bump into WP:NOTBROKEN B) you have turned the lede into a list which is handled better in the filmography. One more thing it is a great idea to use an edit summary to explain what you are doing for the benefit of other editors. MarnetteD|Talk 18:02, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

For comments at ANI. Sometimes I'm my own worst enemy, but what is done is done. Appreciate you taking a few moments out of your editing time for me. Thanks again! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:56, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome L. Sometimes, when things get too frustrating, I'll type a rude edit summary but then change it to a generic one before hitting the save (er I mean Publish changes) button. It helps a little :-) Best regards and enjoy the rest of your week. MarnetteD|Talk 15:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

User:SulaymaanKhan/sandbox

Actually, only one of the creators is now blocked. I merged it with the versions of the other creator. And it's only a user name soft block. Probably they are one in the same.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:47, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the update Dlohcierekim. Looked a bit dodgy so I appreciate you taking the time to fill me in.Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 04:49, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Really?

OK. Why are you stalking me and undoing all my edits? Do you not find it odd that Antigua and Barbuda somehow went by for months without having the Prime Minister listed? 2600:8800:5A80:1394:402B:9598:36A8:D238 (talk) 03:58, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

You have not provided a source for a single edit. Thus they get reverted. MarnetteD|Talk 04:19, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Edit count

I see that you have passed John Carter. You may recall six months ago that this was the user who I had to pass in order to climb back to position 163 (I managed this on 11 February 2018 when I actually climbed from 165 to 164). Since then I've fluctuated between 162 and 165; I'm currently at 163. My peak is still 162, and every time that I get there I seem to get busted back to 164 or 165 again by WP:MEATBOTs such as Illegitimate Barrister (talk · contribs) and Red Director (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:43, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Redrose64. Thanks for the update and I know what you mean about the meatbot situation. Just think if Ser Amantio stopped editing today and we kept editing at our current pace for another 20 years we'd still be a million edits behind him :-) Enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk

Apology

I had reverted you edit on Trickster. MY fault for not finding the relevant section in the article you Wikilinked to about the Philippine animal. I'm sorry about that. Pete unseth (talk) 12:41, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

No worries Pete unseth. I had checked it when the link was added and remembered having to read the whole article to find the trickster reference. In fact your edit gave me a chance to improve the link. Best regards and have a nice weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 15:35, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Westroads Mall linkrot

I think you missed one. (Didn't want to just re-tag). MB 16:49, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks MB. Turns out there were two. Whenever there is anything in the ref tags other than the bare url reFill can't fix it. I'm glad you let me know about this. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 17:26, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

One you tagged as dead actually works; it just take 5-10 seconds to render the page. I went ahead an used Template:citeweb manually. Thanks. MB 18:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that MB. When I clicked on the link it ran for nearly 30 seconds and then went to a blank page so I tagged it. I'm glad it worked for you and that you made the needed changes. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 19:04, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello MarnetteD. I am enjoying seeing how you (usually you} are fixing the articles I am tagging for linkrot. I have sometimes thought I should figure out how to use Reflinks myself, but there are already enough other things to keep me busy for years - so it seems like efficient collaboration to leave it to others. But I have wondered why you aren't adding |accessdate= as I always thought it was important to aid in future linkrot. I always add it when creating a new ref. MB 02:29, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

I only run the program as is MB and it doesn't always add it. You see it is not creating a new ref - rather it is adapting an old one and (I am guessing) there is no way to know when a given edit was added. Digging through the edit history to find a specific edit would be an onerous task that I wouldn't expect anyone to do. Now, as I am not a programmer, I should add that I do not know all of the ins and outs of either reFill or reflinks so my answer is probably unsatisfactory for you. You could try asking at the WP:VPT and see if you can get a fuller answer. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 02:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)(talk page watcher) An access date is [t]he full date when the content pointed to by url was last verified to support the text in the article. Unless MarnetteD is checking that the references support the content, |access-date= should not be added. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for chiming in JJMC89. Much appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 02:51, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

OK, my memory was that accessdate was the date the url was known to be working. The documentation says "Note that access-date is the date that the URL was found to be working AND (emphasis added) to support the text being cited." I wasn't suggesting you look through the edit history to find the original access date. I routinely add the accessdate (of today) for an old ref if doing anything substantial in an article. But since you're not reading the refs to verify they are accurate then it looks like you shouldn't add the date. Regards. MB 03:09, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Dracula isn't Supernatural Horror?

Hey Marnette! Just curious as to why you don't feel Bram Stoker's Dracula should be categorized as supernatural horror? I'd mostly like your rationale because that cat was added to a number of other articles as well, and I'm questioning the appropriateness of it in general based on your revert. To me it would be self-apparent that BSD includes supernatural and horror elements, making the cat appropriate, but I respect your perspective on such matters as well. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 12:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

The answer is in the edit summary Doniago. Per WP:CATVER categories must have sourced info in the article. The only thing I could find was horror. As you know categories (like additions to the body of the article} are made based on sources. I do understand what you are saying so if you can find a WP:RS for supernatural horror please add it and the cat to the article. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 14:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

I admit I'm the first to rail against WP:BLUE as an argument for not providing sources, but I'll admit in this case my inclination is to say "But...but...Dracula...so obviously supernatural!" A Google search for "bram stoker's dracula "supernatural horror"" yielded a few possibly worthwhile hits, but I have to admit I don't really strongly care one way or another; I'm just curious to see whether anyone will raise the question at the article's Talk page, and as the editor who added the cat has had their wrist slapped more than a few times, I guess I'm inclined to try to grant them a little leeway where possible. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 14:48, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Well keep it in the back of your mind D and if anything turns up you can always add it at a later date. MarnetteD|Talk 15:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Heh heh. Funny to tag me like that when that's how The King of Vampires tends to sign his correspondence.

Hm. It does seem that film sites tend to categorize it more as "period horror" than "supernatural horror", though...well, I guess if anyone brings it up we can talk about it further. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 15:46, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of variations on a theme D I'm re-watching Penny Dreadful (TV series). I think it is well written and the acting is top notch. I'm getting more out of it this time around as well. Not everyone's cup iof blood but I thought it worth mentioning in case you haven't seen it. MarnetteD|Talk 15:58, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Hmm! I may have to check this one out. Horror (gory horror in particular) isn't usually my cup of tea, but this sounds like it might be fun. DonIago (talk) 16:04, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Well the gory moments are very Grand Guignol D but they are balanced with thought provoking passages. I also find that it blends the Victorian horror stories better than most of the other attempts (and there are many now) out there. If you wind up hating it I can but apologize ahead of time. I should add that if you get to season three there is an episode where Rory Kinnear and Eva Green strike acting sparks of each other that is a marvel to behold. MarnetteD|Talk 16:48, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Well, it's fairly amusing that you're referring me to this series in the same week in which I read my first ever serious review of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which seems to have somewhat similar conceits (I've never seen the film or read the comic). I've wishlisted it on Amazon, so we'll see whether anything comes of it. Thanks for the referral! The last real horror series I watched was True Blood...I made it through the season with the witches, but while I have the next season available I just haven't watched it, and it weighs upon me knowing that the series goes downhill and that the final episode is apparently nothing special. Sad given that the series was conceived by the same person who did Six Feet Under, one of my all time faves featuring a tremendous final episode. DonIago (talk) 17:12, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks re pings

Thanks, I didn't know that. I thought that just resigning it would be enough.. --ColinFine (talk) 08:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome ColinFine. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 19:00, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Casino

If you have a moment, would you mind taking a look at the recent edits to Casino? I'm too involved to be objective, and the other editor thinks I'm stalking him. Anything I do at this point is going to make matters worse, and I'd prefer an uninvolved editor's opinion. Thanks, as always. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 17:33, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello TOJ. I hope you are well! I see that CR has started a thread on the talk page so I've added it to my watchlist and will chime in if needed. The editor certainly is treating this as a WP:BATTLEGROUND. Always so tiresome. On a happier note the Criterion Collection is coming out with this box set next month and reading about it is making my mouth water :-P Cheers and enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 17:46, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Well, if it needs to be said, I am not stalking them. Our watchlists obviously cross at several points and I have reverted their edits a couple times before, but this is certainly not part of a campaign. The argument that "other articles have unnecessary details, so why shouldn't this one?" is, of course, a nonstarter. We'll see where it goes.

The last time Criterion had one of their 24 hour 50% off sales, it was all I could do to keep from draining my bank account. Do you ever watch the segments on their webpage, when various people visit the "Criterion closet" and take home a stack of DVDs and Blu-rays? What do I have to do to rate such a visit? I'll get started right now! ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 19:15, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

You are correct on all counts about the article TOJ. A couple years ago I learned to be patient and wait for the next 50% sale to get the new films that I wanted to add to my library - although I couldn't do that with their Barry Lyndon release. I love the "Criterion closet" segments!! If I were in there I would have to do as Dennis did in "The Fifty-Thousandth Customer" episode of Dennis the Menace TV show. The stipulation was that the winner had to physically carry all the items out of the store so Dennis grabbed an assembled hammock and threw everything that he could into it and then hauled it to the door. Sooooo the Criterion shelves would be bare after I got done with them :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 19:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Genius! ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 22:52, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks TOJ. I forgot to mention that I am reading this marvelous book about Stanley's masterpiece. It is thorough and well researched. I am enjoying it immensely. Amazing to think it it is only a few weeks until the 50th anniversary of when I saw it the first time. Cheers again. MarnetteD|Talk 23:16, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Cheers to you! I will look for that book. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 02:46, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome TOJ. I think it will be worth your time. MarnetteD|Talk 02:48, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Actually, I missed a friend's birthday recently, and I think that will be the perfect way to make up for it. He's an even bigger Kubrick fan than I am, which is saying something. He's also old enough to have seen 2001 in the theatre, while on acid. He loves telling that story. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 11:49, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

An excellent choice TOJ. You might pass along a link to the Cinema Treasures website so he can see if any of the theaters that he saw the film in are listed on it. Fun for you too for that matter :-) MarnetteD|Talk 18:35, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh, that is great! Thank you! I know the theatre he saw it in, though, it was the old Princess Theatre here in B-ton. The place is now a high-end cocktail bar. But, he'll love that site, and so will I. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 00:00, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

It is a fun "trip down memory lane" website TOJ. Along with The Cooper it has a few other theaters that I saw it at over the years. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 00:10, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

This incredible theater is the one I mentioned above. A real state of the art palace/temple for a film fanatic like myself. MarnetteD|Talk 00:13, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Local Hero

Thank you. Just one of those movies that sticks in your mind over the decades - small quiet pieces that add up just right. Cheers. Jmg38 (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome Jmg38 and thanks again for your edit. Truly a special gem of a film. I keep hoping that the Criterion Collection will work their magic on a new bluray/DVD release. BTW if you've never seen it you might want to give Housekeeping (film) a try. While it doesn't reach LH's heights it does have many of Forsyth's wonderful touches. It was badly marketed in its US release but I've been a fan since I first saw it back in 1987. The book is special as well. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 01:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Luan Peters

Why do you keep changing the new information about Luan’s death? Mr Mouat (talk) 16:03, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Mr Mouat: MarnetteD has done this because of the strict policies on verifiability and on biographies of living persons: any claims of somebody's death must be backed up by a reliable source. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:10, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the policy links Redrose64. Mr Mouat I started this thread Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Luan Peters in hopes that we can get info that meets WikiP's requirements. MarnetteD|Talk 18:39, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Bruno Mattei

Thanks for fixing the references on the Mattei page. Appreciate it 68.129.15.71 (talk) 20:25, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome. MarnetteD|Talk 20:28, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Can you tell me if this is a reliable source for wikipedia? http://www.mrqe.com/pages/about68.129.15.71 (talk) 18:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello 68. I hink it might be but I'm not entirely sure. I would suggest that you ask at the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard or the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. They should be able to give you a definitive answer fairly quickly. MarnetteD|Talk 19:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Murder by Death

You deleted my update with the comment "Not a sequel", I didn't claim it was a sequel in my posting. Please help me understand Damiantgordon (talk) 15:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

See my edit and summary moving the film to the see also section. MarnetteD|Talk 15:58, 15 June 2018 (UTC)